From: Tony Rodriguez <unixpro1970@gmail.com>
To: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de>,
Stian Halseth <stian@itx.no>,
Andreas Larsson <andreas@gaisler.com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>,
sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sparc64: Use relaxed ordering for DMA_FROM_DEVICE mappings on sun4v
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2026 14:25:21 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <04b9af90-721e-414e-828d-9fa44ce759f2@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0892a8803ca20869cd8cc76fcffc9f7543cffd2f.camel@physik.fu-berlin.de>
On 10/21/26 1:49 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> Hi Tony,
>
> On Wed, 2026-10-21 at 13:30 -0700, Tony Rodriguez wrote:
>> On 10/13/26 6:37 AM, Stian Halseth wrote:
>>
>>> sun4v IOMMU and ATU mappings carry a relaxed ordering attribute, but
>>> dma_4v_map_phys() and dma_4v_map_sg() set it only when the caller
>>> passes DMA_ATTR_WEAK_ORDERING. Some network drivers do, storage drivers
>>> do not. Without it every device write into memory is strictly ordered,
>>> which on a T7-1 (M7) caps DMA reads at about 280 MiB/s per PCIe device
>>> while writes run at full speed.
>>>
>>> Set the attribute for every DMA_FROM_DEVICE streaming mapping. Devices
>>> report completion through coherent memory or an interrupt, which stay
>>> strictly ordered, and a strictly ordered write does not pass the writes
>>> before it.
>>>
>>> T7-1, fio 1M sequential read, QD32:
>>>
>>> before after
>>> NVMe (PM1725, x4) 281 MiB/s 3169 MiB/s
>>> SATA SSD (mpt3sas) 278 MiB/s 502 MiB/s
>>>
>>> Closes: https://github.com/sparclinux/issues/issues/114
>>> Signed-off-by: Stian Halseth <stian@itx.no>
>>> ---
>>> Tested on a T7-1 (M7) and a T4-1:
>>>
>>> - T7: fresh RAID1 on two NVMe drives, 192 GB fio crc32c write+verify
>>> and md check: no errors, mismatch_cnt 0.
>>> - T7 and T4: file checksums on the SAS boot mirrors identical to a
>>> strictly ordered kernel; no new messages in dmesg.
>>> - 4k random read and sequential writes unchanged.
>>>
>>> arch/sparc/kernel/pci_sun4v.c | 4 ++--
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/sparc/kernel/pci_sun4v.c b/arch/sparc/kernel/pci_sun4v.c
>>> index 61f14b4c8f90d..4dd17b65dd6cc 100644
>>> --- a/arch/sparc/kernel/pci_sun4v.c
>>> +++ b/arch/sparc/kernel/pci_sun4v.c
>>> @@ -403,7 +403,7 @@ static dma_addr_t dma_4v_map_phys(struct device *dev, phys_addr_t phys,
>>> if (direction != DMA_TO_DEVICE)
>>> prot |= HV_PCI_MAP_ATTR_WRITE;
>>>
>>> - if (attrs & DMA_ATTR_WEAK_ORDERING)
>>> + if (direction == DMA_FROM_DEVICE || (attrs & DMA_ATTR_WEAK_ORDERING))
>>> prot |= HV_PCI_MAP_ATTR_RELAXED_ORDER;
>>>
>>> local_irq_save(flags);
>>> @@ -503,7 +503,7 @@ static int dma_4v_map_sg(struct device *dev, struct scatterlist *sglist,
>>> if (direction != DMA_TO_DEVICE)
>>> prot |= HV_PCI_MAP_ATTR_WRITE;
>>>
>>> - if (attrs & DMA_ATTR_WEAK_ORDERING)
>>> + if (direction == DMA_FROM_DEVICE || (attrs & DMA_ATTR_WEAK_ORDERING))
>>> prot |= HV_PCI_MAP_ATTR_RELAXED_ORDER;
>>>
>>> outs = s = segstart = &sglist[0];
>> Tested-by: Tony Rodriguez <unixpro1970@gmail.com>
>>
>> Tested on a Sparc S7-2 with a Samsung 2TB EVO SATA SSD.
>> No functional issues or major regressions were observed.
> Did you also see the vast improvement that Stian has reported?
>
> Adrian
Yes, with certain fio tests. IOPS have improved:
Note(s):
1) The following output does not include Stian's AES patch (needed to
test against luks). Reached out to him about a question regarding
applying that patch. In other words, this is a non luks tests.
2) I also don't have NVMe installed within my Sparc S7-2.
3) Sata SSD will not reach NVMe performance (due to Sata SSD design
limitation). However, improvements were noticed with Sata SSD.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A = Before Patch B = After Patch
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A1) Jobs: 1 (f=1): [R(1)][100.0%][r=314MiB/s][r=314 IOPS]
read: IOPS=314, BW=314MiB/s (329MB/s)(18.4GiB/60101msec)
B1) Jobs: 1 (f=1): [R(1)][100.0%][r=544MiB/s][r=544 IOPS]
read: IOPS=543, BW=543MiB/s (570MB/s)(31.9GiB/60058msec)
A2) Jobs: 4 (f=4): [R(4)][100.0%][r=456MiB/s][r=456 IOPS]
read: IOPS=456, BW=456MiB/s (478MB/s)(26.8GiB/60273msec)
B2) Jobs: 4 (f=4): [R(4)][100.0%][r=544MiB/s][r=544 IOPS]
read: IOPS=544, BW=544MiB/s (570MB/s)(32.0GiB/60232msec)
A4) Jobs: 1 (f=1): [r(1)][100.0%][r=36.5MiB/s][r=9346 IOPS]
read: IOPS=9824, BW=38.4MiB/s (40.2MB/s)(2303MiB/60001msec)
B4) Jobs: 1 (f=1): [r(1)][100.0%][r=44.7MiB/s][r=11.4k IOPS]
read: IOPS=11.4k, BW=44.6MiB/s (46.8MB/s)(2676MiB/60001msec)
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-21 21:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CGME20261013133752eucas1p1ad5d155a4dd8316d7a3da5cb7772af3f@eucas1p1.samsung.com>
2026-10-13 13:37 ` Stian Halseth
2026-10-13 13:57 ` Leon Romanovsky
2026-10-13 15:17 ` Marek Szyprowski
2026-10-21 20:30 ` Tony Rodriguez
2026-10-21 20:49 ` John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
2026-10-21 21:25 ` Tony Rodriguez [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=04b9af90-721e-414e-828d-9fa44ce759f2@gmail.com \
--to=unixpro1970@gmail.com \
--cc=andreas@gaisler.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de \
--cc=leon@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=m.szyprowski@samsung.com \
--cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stian@itx.no \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®